Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re Marriage of Havens

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 3, 1991No. 3—90—0383Published

1Dissent

PRESIDING JUSTICE STOUDER,

dissenting:

Because I find Georgia Havens’ rights to due process were violated in the instant case, I dissent. In cases of indirect civil contempt a defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the contempt charge. (In re Estate of Shlensky (1977), 49 Ill. App. 3d 885, 364 N.E.2d 430.) At the same time, civil contempt proceedings do not require that a defendant be personally present. (Comet Casualty Co. v. Schneider (1981), 98 Ill. App. 3d 786, 424 N.E.2d 911.) Georgia appeared by her attorney. There was no question that she had submitted herself to the in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Comet Casualty Co. v. SchneiderAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981
  2. In Re Estate of ShlenskyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1977
  3. In Re Marriage of MarksAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API